Politics of SWRP

[Grumpy Panda]

What if we took all the money raised for political campaigns and used it to pay off the deficit?

[Apillis]

Well, I am a registered voting member of the Libertarian Party for the past 14 years now (since I was 18 years old). And quite honestly, I was quite pleased with Biden's interrupting Ryan several times (which I find amusing that Republicans didn't care Romney's doing so to Obama, yet scream bloody murder when Biden did so to Ryan; which goes to show if you want to be the big fat bully on the playground--you better be ready to take a punch in the face from time to time and not whine about it unless you want to play the role of the victim). For numerous reasons, but primarily for two:

1) He's an absolute hypocritical political weasel and enjoyed it thoroughly when Biden pointed it out in regards to his stimulus requests. I live in Saint Paul, MN, and Wisconsin isn't even a couple hour drive from where I live, so Wisconsin state politics we get quite often--hell, we even have some of their public television stations here. And he's really been utterly dismal for his district--notice he doesn't really tout his accomplishments there, and that's because he hasn't really done anything there. His whole career is primarily based on his insane budget, but outside of that it's been pretty meager and sparse for the years he's held his seat.

2) The problem with the Teabagger Congressmen (in general) is that they're gung-ho to get into office and/or hold their seats, but do absolutely nothing to actually govern while in Congress. The bigger irony even being while they piss and moan about government being ineffectual, here they are with government jobs doing jack %$#@ about it. It's kinda' hard to reform what you call a "broken system" when you're actively breaking it with a lack of governing.

*******

The problem with the debt and presidential elections is, all the money that has been spent in the presidential elections this year equates to over a billion dollars. The debt is around 15 trillion, and let's say despite that billion being solely for this year alone, let's just say that's how much was spent in every presidential election going all the way back to George Washington (though he didn't have to run for office, he was pretty much just resoundingly appointed). So that's 44 election cycles (I know, I'm not counting more than one term, but won't need to go into that kind of detail to make the point), it would still only cover about 0.034% of the national debt. Even 44 billion dollars spent over the course of four years over the span of a couple centuries won't make a dent into 15 trillion (and yes, I know didn't count every 4 years in that figure, but as you can see, doesn't make any significant difference).

I mean, there is a proven method of ending that level of debt, and it's not merely cutting the very governing apparati that enables the US to operate as a 1st World Nation. But unfortunately it's been through higher taxes. The thing people seem to refuse to understand about having a capitalist free market place is that the taxes of that capitalist nation needs to rise and fall with its current as a practical measure. Having roughly the same tax rate as there was during the Great Depression doesn't exactly spell economic success for any nation, especially when the market place isn't any thing like was over a half-century ago in comparison to what it is now. The constant avocation to change tax rates and governing bodies into what they were in yesteryear when the nation was still in its infancy and before it became a global world power is just absolutely nonsensical and is nothing but a regression. And the more those policies continue to regress the US, I'm continually more dumbfounded that US citizens and politicians are surprised by our decline.

It's all just a bunch of %$#@ing lunacy.

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

I have just one thing to say Apillis.

[Grumpy Panda]

I would tend to agree. I've yet to find any politician that isn't a hypocrite or weasel. For the most part they get paid to lie to us. Even better, they get paid more than the average american. So, washington has lots of rich people who I would consider out of touch with normal lives. Also, the amount of lobbyists, special interests, ear marks, and so forth don't make it much better.

As for a president, he is just one man with very limited power. He can't save the nation with the wave of his hand and some promises. He can't exactly create jobs on a whim. He can't control the economy. By far and large, I find it appalling that people would think he could. I see the president as just what he is, an exucutive. This means he administers the law and acts as a spokesman.

Perhaps people don't have to take a class on government in high school anymore.

On one side you have a group that wants social freedom and economic control. On the other side you have economic freedom and social control. It's like kids fighting about who had the best pencil in first grade. It's nonsense. Our country is being run into the ground.

I suppose that's why american voters have a responsibility to choose properly, but still we are mostly given choice between the two kids arguing about who draws the best stick figures. While it's all well and good we voters have a responsibility, it feels to me that due diligence is lost. People listen to the news rather than doing research. I even remember people (college students to be specific) voting for O-man just because he was black.

So who is guilty for the decline of our country? The politicians for running it into the ground? Corporations for using their hooks for special interests? The people? Everyone. The answer is everyone.

We can't really expect our leaders to be accountable when we really don't hold them accountable. We fail to hold ourselves accountable as well. We all preach at each other about issues and how others should deal with them, but when it comes to ourselves personally, we make exceptions. "Oh, but I had this. Oh, I thought this." Really...?

So, I've deemed that this election and probably most elections to follow are bollocks.


How do I feel about the candidates?

Romney: Probably sees the country as a monopoly game. While I agree with more of his policies than obamas, he is still just a shiny turd.

Ryan: Intelligent. Maybe too intelligent. He has potential both good and bad.

Obama: When asked why he should get another term, his response was simply that he deserved it. Yeah, no. Failed to deal with Gitmo as he promised. Still uses drones to bomb civilians. The bank bailout. Nope.

Biden: Some old guy that I always forget is involved with things. He did throw the intelligence community under the bus in the debates. GG.

So realistically, we have a choice between turd team 1 and turd team 2. I like to call it coffee and cheesecake.

I'm quite partial to writing in candidates. Here are some candidates I would suggest writing in: Optimus prime, captain planet, the green ranger, yoda, luke skywalker, dohvakhin, thrall.

While I understand the pragmatism of choosing one of the two big candidates, I believe it is time people take back responsibility and face the long road to recovery.

Honestly, it won't happen. Our culture has become to dependent on convenience and first world problems. We want quick fixes, not truth and real fixes. We like being told what we want to hear, not what we need to hear.

So I suppose the relevant question is when do we see collapse? MIT predicted 2030 if things keep going the way they are.

[Apillis]

I'll be quite candid in saying that I really don't find Paul Ryan to be that intelligent, and the fact Republicans like to tout him as their big "idea guy" replacing Cheney, Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich as such before him speaks volumes to me. A guy who will tout how great Ayn Rand is one second to the point he mandates his interns all read her book, and then when questioned on it because she was atheist he completely turns right around &@#%s on her (not that I care that much, I loathe her philosophies), but it speaks volumes more of his character. And the guy who will jokingly give reporters crap for giving him "softball" questions, and so a reporter then responds by asking him about abortion, he then suddenly starts to literally back out of the interview--that doesn't exactly scream an intelligent politician to me (as many other antics he's done both socially and politically over the course of his career).

And Romney... he is just like every single CEO client I have had to work with in my time working for HP for the past 3+ years now. His ideas, the way we presents them, the way he gives his little "economic sermons and soliloquies", all the while trying to purport himself as merely a businessman despite his running for political office for the past 20 years now, making him as much of a politician as any other in Washington DC. On top of his complete lack of spine to personally speak out against the more radical elements of the Republican Party. At least Obama has enough sand to go against his own party line via willing to negotiate something as large as Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid reform. Romney has yet to show the spine to even present something that impacting that would go against the Republican platform insanity.

What bothers me with Obama is when has a legitimate case to really push against the Teabagger angst driven Republican party, he always backs the hell down. Gitmo is a prime example of that, he had the chance, he went for it--he challenged the Republicans on it, but in the end backed down. And the same damn thing happened with the Debt Ceiling Crisis. Once again, he found himself square in the right, he had the Teabagger wingnut Republican driven party's back to the wall, and he friggin' backs down again. It's only after that whole Debt Ceiling debacle that he's finally gotten a clue and is actually doing some fighting. Irony is though, most the policies he's putting forward are the Republican's own former infrastructure and economic platform policies. Bigger irony, rather than rejoicing that, and taking advantage of getting what they've been trying to get into law for 20+ years, the Republicans crap all over it and then bastardize it. And I can't help but think, "What the hell are you doing? YOU'RE GETTING WHAT YOU'VE WANTED FOR FRIGGIN' DECADES!!! AND YOU'RE PEEING ALL OVER IT!!!"

Biden... what can I say. I actually love the guy. My great grandfather (my grandmother's father on my dad's side) came out of the Great Depression era, and he always voted Democrat, because as he would say, "Democrat. For the workin' man.", which in his day, they were. They were for Unions, it was a time when people literally died from just outright poor working conditions alone, because the corporate bosses literally didn't care enough to spend the money to provide better working conditions. Hence why government regulations and Unions as supported by the Democratic party were created, to literally prevent workers from being killed by simply going to work from crap working conditions by their bosses. Biden reminds me of those old, hard-nose Democrats from yesteryear fighting for peoples human rights. It reflects in his career, such as the Violence Against Women Act that was drafted in his very office, also the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, often working with Republicans for Tax Relief efforts (hell, he did the same in '10 as VP), the guy has been fighting for peoples civil liberties since he got into office in the early-70s--i.e. doing his damn job. And he was the only Senator of his time (and to this day), who didn't get residence in Washington DC, he commuted via the damn Amtrak train throughout his career until becoming VP. That all speaks volumes to me of his character, because it shows to me that recognizes what a Senator is, which many forget--which is that he's a public servant, thus takes the same mode of transportation as any other schmo out there to go to work. And he acts on something that so many Democrats fail to do when they actually have something worthy to fight for, which is actually fighting for it. That's why I love the guy. And to top it all off, he doesn't have any scandals in his background, just litany of silly gaffs. And if that's the worst you can say about the man, then he deserves to be in office in my book.

What bothers me most about the current political climate of today is that the majority of the politicians seem to have forgotten everything they learned even just simple high school Civics class (or just willfully ignore it), while the majority of the country's citizens all seem to have never taken the class to begin with.

It's just a greater reminder to me why their needs to be a Civics class in the first place. Yet, the Conservative text book education board, which is housed in Texas have probably dumbed it all down to the level of stupidity since I was last in school (which was already hamstrung even then). And then people wonder why education in this country is so hampered in comparison to the other 1st World Nations...

Sigh...

[Grumpy Panda]

"What bothers me most about the current political climate of today is that the majority of the politicians seem to have forgotten everything they learned even just simple high school Civics class (or just willfully ignore it), while the majority of the country's citizens all seem to have never taken the class to begin with."

^This.

I have my own convictions, persuasions, and beliefs. But I do not see why everyone has to fight instead of coming to the table and talking like mature adults with a sense of respect, diplomacy, and intellectual ability. I mean, maybe I was just raised by really weird parents. Maybe I'm not even an american, but yeah. While we can all debate on fine points, surely we can all agree something has to change soon.

No one will agree on everything. That's just how we are. But yeah.

[Rugs]

I do always love this time of year, since it's when all the low-info people and people that try way too hard to be cynical start flooding my facebook and twitter feeds. Loads of amusement.

Anyway, I've been busy and sick, so I haven't had time to post my prediction like I said I would, but nothing's really changed in the time since.

My map looks like this, and has for a while. I honestly think Bams will take Virginia (putting the split at 303/235) but I'm being nice. Not that it really matters. Florida could go either way. It, Virginia, and Colorado are the only states that I'd call toss ups, and it's been that way for a while. Problem for Mittens, going back to the post I made over the summer about how hard it's going to be for him to win there, is that he can take all three and that won't win him the election.

Popular vote probably be fairly close percentage wise, and I'm expecting about a 2-3 percent split. But, barring any surprises, the electoral math probably won't really be close.

[Apillis]

To quote the Illusive Man, "Diplomacy is great when it works."

But it's difficult when those you're trying negotiate with--have no interest in what you have to say. And in that situation, you have to fight for what you stand for. As my dad would tell me (and I'm sure a lot of people's parents have told them), "If you're not willing to fight for the ideal you believe in and what you know to be true. Then it probably wasn't worth fighting for to begin with."

When I know one side is seeking to infringe upon and even eradicate my civil rights and others, because they seek to make policy based off of their religious belief structure and thereby ignoring Separation from Church and State. I'm going to fight that. Because I rather act, than merely standing on the side-lines trying to talk to someone who doesn't want to hear what I have to say. Rights to me--as a Libertarian--are non-negotiable, because that's what makes them rights. Taxes, policy--sure, I can compromise, I can chat it out til the sun comes down. But my civil and even my human rights? No. I'm not negotiating what freedoms I have.

*********

Rugs, that electoral map is pretty much what I'm thinking it's going to be. Sad part is Romney's team is going to be seeking to claim PA, but likelihood of that happening is dismal. Romney's best shot lies in trying to steal Ohio from Obama, but with the election only a few days away--that too is going to be quite unlikely. Barring some unknown factor changing the nature of pretty much... everything. XD

[Grumpy Panda]

I don't think either side really has the people at heart. It's just a game for rich people.

[Grumpy Panda]

I saw an e-card today that gave me a good laugh.

Reelecting Obama is like backing up the titanic and hitting the iceberg again. Electing Romney is like hitting a different iceberg.

[0bserver]

A voice from across the continent.

I've been keeping an eye on the election campaign going on in USA, from time to time, and listened to some debates... So my question is: Why do you people feel obligated to vote either for Republics or Democrats? Their candidates are just bad. Aren't there any other parties you could vote for?

[Rugs]

There are a number of reasons, and that's a discussion I don't really have time to go into in depth. I'll say this. It is because A) Third party candidates tend to be crazy on the fringes of the political scale, which doesn't lend itself to gaining traction with the electorate as a whole and B) they don't have the money to compete with the main parties, and some of that can be attributed to inertia. There are a lot of other things that come into play, but those tend to be major factors. You could also say it's the way things have just always been, by and large. US political parties have risen and fallen over the course of our history, and changed philosophies many different times, but by and large, it's been dominated by two major factions throughout, even going back to the debate between Federalists/Anti-Federalists at the birth of the country.

Another way to explain it would be to say it's an example of Duverger's Law, and it pretty much is.

ETA: I guess I could add a link for that

[sparrow]

Nov 5, 2012 13:10:53 GMT -5 0bserver said:

A voice from across the continent.

I've been keeping an eye on the election campaign going on in USA, from time to time, and listened to some debates... So my question is: Why do you people feel obligated to vote either for Republics or Democrats? Their candidates are just bad. Aren't there any other parties you could vote for?

It's an unfortunate consequence of the "first past the post" voting system and the Spoiler Effect.

[Raytheon]

Bi-partisanship something to know about Americans and while I'm ashamed to say it being an American a majority of us are ignorant, severely ignorant and get the information we know from TV. Being that both parties the Republican and Democratic parties are both powerhouses and hold the sole ability to out campaign and out advertise other parties like the libertarian, tea party, American Nazi party (thank god, and no joke it's real) and well as Independents.

A majority of Americans simply don't know they exist, they don't get invited to debates or get media coverage which the two larger parties buy like M&M's. And Further pay NOT to feature their opponents, given that media does as it will, media company owners are highly political and sway the news to their own opinion making it important to have media on your side. This is where lobbyist come in they petition to the political party more likely to agree with their companies best interest since Republican and Democrats are the largest and most successful they usually side with them and offer them HUGE campaign contributions to continue this vicious cycle of "Bi-Partisanship"

So in the end as always American are tasked with deciding to choose between two bowls of S**t just pick the one that smells the least.

[Grumpy Panda]

I wonder how soon the voting conspiracy theories will come out.

[Raytheon]

New ones are constantly coming out, even as we speak a new one has formed.

[Lemur, The Kool-Aid Guy]

Just thought I might leave this here:

youtu.be/nY0M7IdNl7U

Enjoy seeing legions of clueless people, and weep that they are about to vote.

[Raytheon]

Every statement that came out of the mouths of the people in that video are... speechlessly idiotic.

Now I haven't liked any president since Clinton but to hear someone say "Bush I thought was a good President." .... really? And None of them seems to know Romney's plan at all except his religious views but truly in all fairness 4 years isn't really enough time to get a nation out of a 16 trillion dollar deficit.

Lower it substantially yes, but not eliminate it completely.

(EDIT)

5 minutes later..

Honestly it was difficult to finish watching that video.

[Rugs]

I said I hadn't seen that, vid, but yeah, I have. It's hilarious. And sad. But mostly hilarious.

And I've said it before, just said it in the box, actually, and I'll say it again- debt talks are the low hanging fruit du jour of the American political discourse, because very few people understand how it works and it's easy to manipulate the electorate with scary images and big numbers when they don't understand the workings underneath it. To quote part of an article from Krugman:

Deficit-worriers portray a future in which we’re impoverished by the need to pay back money we’ve been borrowing. They see America as being like a family that took out too large a mortgage, and will have a hard time making the monthly payments.

This is, however, a really bad analogy in at least two ways.

First, families have to pay back their debt. Governments don’t — all they need to do is ensure that debt grows more slowly than their tax base. The debt from World War II was never repaid; it just became increasingly irrelevant as the U.S. economy grew, and with it the income subject to taxation.

Second — and this is the point almost nobody seems to get — an over-borrowed family owes money to someone else; U.S. debt is, to a large extent, money we owe to ourselves.

This was clearly true of the debt incurred to win World War II. Taxpayers were on the hook for a debt that was significantly bigger, as a percentage of G.D.P., than debt today; but that debt was also owned by taxpayers, such as all the people who bought savings bonds. So the debt didn’t make postwar America poorer. In particular, the debt didn’t prevent the postwar generation from experiencing the biggest rise in incomes and living standards in our nation’s history.

But isn’t this time different? Not as much as you think.

It’s true that foreigners now hold large claims on the United States, including a fair amount of government debt. But every dollar’s worth of foreign claims on America is matched by 89 cents’ worth of U.S. claims on foreigners. And because foreigners tend to put their U.S. investments into safe, low-yield assets, America actually earns more from its assets abroad than it pays to foreign investors. If your image is of a nation that’s already deep in hock to the Chinese, you’ve been misinformed. Nor are we heading rapidly in that direction.

[Dr. Jake]

lmr, that video at 1:01 !!!!

America! Not all of us Christians are crazies!

Just thought I would say that.

Also, Rugsy, Lmr, Apillis, Nervous? I was pretty confident that Obama would take the cake, but now I'm beginning to worry. Midwest will be a cakewalk, and Nevada and NH will probably go blue. I'm a little worried about Colorado, Penn, and Ohio. They are leaning towards Obama, but I just don't know.

I'm quite ready for this to be over.

And finally, I apologize for my inactivity. I've been swamped with half a dozen English projects.